Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysia’s fallen son, is attempting the greatest political comeback in Malaysian history. Traitor or saviour with a ‘New Agenda’? Trapped between the Charybdis of his political past and the Scylla of political obscurity, Anwar Ibrahim attempts the seemingly impossible. Face to Face examines the undeniable ‘Anwar Factor’ in this exclusive interview.

1. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: You’ve have been accused of being a traitor by high-ranking Umno officials. That’s a damning accusation that still resonates with some party members. What would you say to them?

Anwar Ibrahim: The credibility of these people and their leadership must first be considered before giving much credence to accusations they level at me or anyone else who breaks from the party line. Their accusations are simply an attempt to deflect from the central issues raised, namely corruption and the abuse of power.

I joined the opposition because it is clear that the system of UMNO-dominated BN politics is failing to serve the interests of the people and the nation. These leaders who oppose me are the ones most averse to change and reform of a system that grows increasingly corrupt and detached from the aspirations of the Malaysian people.

If we are to ascribe treachery to anyone the first in line should be those who are complicit in the theft of our nation’s wealth, the squandering of resources and the mismanagement of our economy that has led to Malaysia’s decline in competitiveness and national income. We have adduced evidence of this corruption but it is being ignored by the mainstream media and covered up by the authorities.

2. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Has six hard years in prison altered your thoughts or outlook towards issues affecting the nation? If so, in what way is your political campaign different this time?

Anwar Ibrahim: The period of my incarceration did nothing other than to strengthen and intensify my resolve to pursue the cause of freedom and justice. Now, this could be a dangerous thing because it could induce one to commit what Alfred North Whitehead called “the fallacy of misplaced concreteness”, in other words, substitute models for reality and artificial constructs for real life. That would be recipe for disaster and one of the reasons why many of the socio-political schemes of the last century eventuated in bloody disaster.

On the contrary, my time in prison and the company of the great books of Eastern and Western literature facilitated a prolonged period of solitary reflection and meditation on the fundamental principles which I believe in and support. After a 30-year quest in which my evolving worldview was subjected to the rough-and-tumble of the political arena, I was presented with the unique opportunity to withdraw into splendid isolation. After re-examining my worldview, its premises and postulates, and modulate it with the experiential wisdom culled from time spent in struggle, I believe I emerged with something of the sense of serenity, which Albert Camus observed as the distinctive property of great works of art.

This calm reconciles you to awaiting what William James called “the receptivities of the moment” upon which effective leadership is dependent. You know more about pacing your purposes to events that predispose the public to support them.

This is all very pertinent to the political campaign of keADILan. Its content, execution, pacing, and calibration have all the wisdom of the mastered tribulation my colleagues and I have endured and will continue to endure in the face of an oppressive system that is stultified in its own inertia. What you are seeing in our campaign is the mature fruit of our travail in quest for a more egalitarian Malaysia that is still a place where the hard working, resourceful, and dedicated citizens can compete and thrive.

In a practical sense, we are focused on public education and outreach. It is a new thing for Malaysians to consider opposition politics not merely as a peripheral phenomenon but rather as a movement that is very much an integral part of the mainstream. We are assuring the people that in light of the failures of the existing system they need not fear the prospects for change and reform. This new landscape is one in which their concerns will be addressed and their rights will be safeguarded, indeed more so than is currently the case.

3. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Let’s talk about your ‘New Agenda’ vis-à-vis the National Economic Policy (NEP). This is a one-way ticket to unpopularity as far as the Malay electorate is concerned. Comment?

Anwar Ibrahim: Before we talk about the Malaysian Economic Agenda let us consider for a moment the current state of the Malaysian economy.

We were once peers with Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea. But now our national income is 1/5th that of Singapore and lags behind Taiwan and South Korea.

Let us then consider the relative income levels in Malaysia. The core motive behind the NEP is that the bumiputera must be given special status to promote a gradual but deliberate levelling of the playing field and reduce income disparities among the nation’s ethnic groups. This is, we are told, critical to ensuring stability and harmony among the races.

But, in the name of the bumiputera, the government is awarding contracts and stock allocations to family members and cronies, a clear perversion of the NEP’s original intent.

A few have been enriched while the general population derives no benefit from this policy. Inequality is in fact quite substantial in Malaysia if you look at income distribution and the widening gap between the rich and the poor, an issue that the NEP does not address. On this, Malaysia ranks the worst in the region. Its Gini coefficient, the standard measure of income inequality, is far worse than neighbouring countries that are much poorer.

If the nation’s wealth is not being equitably distributed then we have to ask whether the NEP is really achieving its objective? Furthermore, is the UMNO-led government, which claims to champion the cause of the Malays, failing to fulfil its promises to the population?

The Malaysian Economic Agenda represents a clear way out of this malaise. It has been incorrectly portrayed, by UMNO in particular, as an anti-NEP platform to incite fear among the Malays who have been led to believe the NEP is the only safety net protecting them from an economic catastrophe. But what the Malays have not been told is that, as a nation, we are lagging far behind our neighbours and that the economic cake in real terms is shrinking. Whatever growth that is occurring is improving the lot of the upper echelons of society where cronyism and nepotism rule. Other gains in personal income are being eaten up by rising prices. The government may faithfully adhere to the rhetoric of distributive polices but its mismanagement of the economy and the nation’s finances are hurting the people.

The Malaysian Economic Agenda is about sustained economic growth with price stability and distributive justice. In my experience, as I meet Malaysians from all walks of life, when given the facts and the unbiased data, they have responded positively to the Agenda.

4. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Critics are of the view that you have failed to clearly outline a workable blueprint to the ‘New Agenda’. Do you agree?

Anwar Ibrahim: We must not put the cart before the horse. There is still much work to be done in inducing a fundamental shift in thinking and our approach to the management of the economy. Once that new paradigm is firmly in place then the formulation of policies will flow naturally.

Consider the NEP itself. Tun Razak did not create the policies and programs that we now know as the NEP. He planted the idea of aggressive state intervention in economic affairs as a means of achieving more equity in the distribution of national wealth. The challenge of his time was to promote interracial harmony and quell the currents of racial discord fuelled by inequality among communal groups.

Our current reality presents new challenges and requires a profound shift in thinking to see the outcomes and effects of the NEP today. After 30 years of implementation our population has tripled and the entire landscape of the global economy has transformed.

Meanwhile, our economy is lagging and crippled by corruption and the abuse of power. Our workforce cannot compete with the higher-skilled labour force found in our to our region and our educational system has not risen to the task of creating generations of hard-working, creative and entrepreneurial minds imbued with strong ethical values.

The data on this are compelling. Malaysia is five times poorer than Singapore in terms of per capita income, and lags well behind Taiwan and South Korea. We have lost out on foreign direct investment (FDI), which used to be the engine of our economy. We cannot survive as a nation unless we adopt the right strategy to change this.

Yet our leaders and economists are not even talking about how to close this gap and bring the nation back to a competitive position vis-à-vis Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan. They are stuck in the past with obsolete ideas while publicly they convey a sense of false optimism in their pronouncements and prescriptions.

Therefore, we will proceed with purpose and resolve to change those hearts and minds who are imprisoned by the false sense of security that the NEP created and we will win over those who can grasp the challenge of the moment and envision a more prosperous Malaysia from now and not twenty, fifty, or one hundred years from now.

5. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Furthermore, as you are clearly opposed to the NEP what would you institute in its place?

Anwar Ibrahim: The legacy of state intervention in the economy has inhibited the development of a more competitive and adaptive economy. It has rewarded those who have political connections with lucrative contracts and access to markets while the vast majority struggle hard to earn an honest living.

We must resolve this by promoting free markets and rewarding entrepreneurial activity. The rule of law must be seen as sacred and inviolable so that foreign investors feel that their activities in Malaysia will be protected from illegal state intervention and those vested interests who buy judicial and political influence.

At the same time, social safety nets must remain in place to ensure that those who are marginalised and lack education and proper skills continue to receive the assistance that they need irrespective of ethnicity. We will help them to achieve the confidence they need to be self-sufficient.

In the 37 years since the advent of the NEP we cannot deny that there are people from all of our ethnic groups who are facing serious hardships under the present regime. While the special status of the bumiputera is enshrined in the Constitution there is no reason why we cannot, as a nation, make the necessary adjustments to deal justly and fairly with all groups.

6. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: You have stated your ambitions of running for Parliament in 2008. If at all that’s possible and you win, that’s still a long way from being the Prime Minister. What would you do then?

Anwar Ibrahim: People talk about elections in Malaysia as if they were actually conducted freely and with a modicum of integrity. Every election cycle we adduce evidence of massive fraud, phantom voters, gerrymandered districts and voter intimidation. I have proposed a thorough review of the Election Commission and its procedures and called for the government to allow international observers and advisors skilled in the execution of proper elections to assist. But the government continues to deny access and to fails to admit that there is a problem.

My goal has always been to see that the principles of justice, freedom and equity be reflected in this society. My involvement in politics is guided by my commitment to those principles.

In the coming elections the opposition will solidify its role as a mainstream movement based on these core principles. Once in power we can begin to apply our vision of a nation that governs itself according to the Rule of Law. This is a process and our goals will require more than one or two electoral cycles to be realised. The damage that has been done to Malaysia by corruption, nepotism, the fanning of racial tensions, and restrictions on personal freedoms has taken place over several generations. Resolving these issues will take time.

Today, we need great leaders who can transform people’s thinking and restore our dignity in the eyes of the world. Once in power as Members of Parliament, keADILan’s representatives will clearly and decisively outperform their counterparts on the BN side. There is no doubt about this. When it comes to issues of price levels, quality of education, healthcare, and crime, we will be at the forefront of the wave of change. KeADILan’s voice will be heard because it will be loud and coherent and consistent, and will, for the first time in many years in the Parliament, shed light on the vested interests and the cancer of corruption that has become pervasive and endemic.

7. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Would you be willing to give up the prize to be Prime Minister and play the role of the leader of an emboldened shadow government much like that in the UK?

Anwar Ibrahim: The politics of Malaysia and the UK are different and I do not think the comparison is a valid one. Here, to be a political force, keADILan must have seats in Parliament. Otherwise the prevailing system of cronyism and nepotism and the disproportionate control that the ruling party has over the media and civil society virtually preclude the possibility of change.

Once in power keADILan will have a mandate from the people to pursue a reform agenda. The principles of justice and equity reflected in the Party’s manifesto will resonate with Malaysians once they are given an opportunity to hear our message and a fair chance at the polls to elect their government.

Therefore, the notion of an opposition confined to the peripheries or looming in the shadows is a remnant of Malaysia’s past. We envision nothing short of a total transformation in the way that people perceive their government. We believe that a free and fair election is the instrument that will bring leaders with vision and conviction to power.

8. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: You say that Malaysia is losing its competitiveness. Yet the latest United Nations report point to an increase of 52.8% (2006) of foreign direct investment into the country. Please elaborate....

Anwar Ibrahim: It’s true. According to the UNCTAD data, in 2006 Malaysia’s FDI increased from the previous year. But let’s keep things in their proper perspective.

In terms of FDI and market capitalisation we used to be the leading country in the region. Now, Malaysia, a nation of 27 million people, has attracted about $6 billion in FDI in 2006. Singapore, a nation of only 4 million, attracted about $24 billion in FDI in that same period of time. Indonesia attracted almost $6 billion and our neighbour to the North, Thailand, attracted almost $9 billion. Whatever marginal increase we achieved is offset by outflows and the overall loss is standing and stature.

The overall trend gives us further causes for concern. Whereas Malaysian FDI inflows have been generally flat since the late 1990s, our neighbours in the region are showing more dramatic percent increases.

If we look at the domestic data we find more cause for concern. Singapore, Taiwan, and South Korea, once our peers in terms of economic activity, have long since surpassed us, and in all three cases at alarming rates.

Our labour force is unable to compete with those of our neighbours, yet another reason why foreign corporations have taken their investment dollars to neighbouring countries. In spite of this, our government has done very little to improve the quality of education that our citizens receive in the university system and has not provided additional job-training programs and initiatives that will ultimately attract the outside investors.

Our judiciary is and is seen to be compromised. Few Malaysians believe our system works and members of the international community know that when they do business in Malaysia they must proceed with extreme caution. In fact, many have opted to litigate disputes in Singapore and Hong Kong knowing full well that the deck is stacked against them here. The possibility of facing a biased and corrupt judiciary in a country that already shows little respect for the rule of law is a red flag that will dissuade most international corporations from planting roots here, particularly when there are significantly better options in the region.

So there should be no illusion about the state of our competitiveness in the region, and anyone who claims otherwise is using smoke and mirrors to divert the peoples' attention from reality.

9. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: I put it to you that you have practised restraint in your criticisms of the Honourable Prime Minister of Malaysia despite attacking the establishment at large. What do you have to say to that?

Anwar Ibrahim: The Prime Minister and I are from the same state in Malaysia and our localities were not far from each other’s. Growing up, our parents were friends.

With those family ties reaching back several decades and each of us coming from localities where people are imbued in such a way that feeling counts for more than rational thought. My criticism of the government in general and Prime Minister Badawi in particular are confined to questions of policy and the failure of our current leaders to honour promises and commitments they have made to the people.

Abdullah’s four years in power had a bright beginning, followed by a period of stutter, drift and vacillation. The platform on which he arrived in 2003 has now virtually collapsed in a miscellany of earnestly stated intention papering over botched action and implementation, and riddled with the excesses of corruption, nepotism, and political in-fighting.

The upshot is that Abdullah’s Administration has become one in which there is strong speculation he is not really in charge. He is viewed as weak and indecisive and in some quarters not as clean as he is made out to be. Give it a little more time and even those Malays in our localities who would frown upon my criticism against him will now say that his grace period is over and it’s open season.

10. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Do you have a message for the Honourable Prime Minister at this stage of impending elections?

Anwar Ibrahim: This month marks the beginning of Mr. Badawi’s fourth year as Prime Minister. When he entered office he made promises to the people and thus far it can be reasonably argued that none of those promises have been kept. His party is beginning to plant the seeds of another great ruse on the Malaysian people. The Vision 2020 heralded by the previous Prime Minister is being extended to Vision 2057. Our people must wait another generation.

Meanwhile, corruption is on the rise. The economy is still weak and real income is declining as prices rise and are expected to increase in 2008. Our judiciary has lost the confidence of the people.

So my question to him is where are we headed? Why have the promises not been fulfilled? Under what mandate is your government still leading this nation?

11. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: Let’s move away from local politics and look at the problem in Myanmar. Do you agree with Malaysia’s foreign policy on the issue?

Anwar Ibrahim: Malaysia’s policy towards Myanmar is supine. We have to recognise that the military junta is not going to cede ground to the pro-democracy movement led by Nobel Laureate Aung San Su Kyi. We have to lead ASEAN to pressure the junta, diplomatically, and if that doesn’t work, economically. We cannot confine ourselves to rhetorical appeals to the junta to negotiate with Su Kyi.

The United Nations special envoy Ibrahim Gambari has called on ASEAN to apply more pressure on the regime. We have yet to make common cause with Gambari since ASEAN’s constructive engagement policy is a dismal failure. The junta has been given enough time to shift the country towards civilian rule. Their corruption and incompetence have brought a resource-rich country to ruin. This is their worst crime.

The argument that if the junta yields to civilian rule soon it would lead to chaos as in Iraq is an excuse to prolong the military’s control. There is no doubt that continued military rule means continued impoverishment of Myanmar. There must be a transitional government composed of military and pro-democracy representatives for some years before a constitution can be agreed upon and free and fair elections can be held.

12. Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob: The west hails you as a moderate Muslim that could link Muslims to the west on a common platform of ideas or beliefs. How do you see Muslims fairing in 2008 and beyond?

Anwar Ibrahim: One must not generalise on such a broad issue. Just as one cannot say the west is largely Christian when in large part it is actually post-Christian there are a variety of expressions of religiosity and positions throughout the Muslim world. These nuances make for marked differences in the stance and approach of each. To tar each other with a monolithic brush runs the risk of closing the door to dialogue and purposeful engagement.

The chaos that has engulfed Iraq, and the ongoing failure to reach a just resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, will continue to create instability in the region. Because of the United States’ conspicuous role in these conflicts it will continue to lose ground in winning allies among the Muslim peoples. The belligerent stance being taken by the Bush Administration against Iran is eerily reminiscent of the type of rhetoric that preceded the invasion of Iraq and we would expect any such pre-emptive strike on Iran to have disastrous consequences on the region and the world.

The East-West dichotomy, however, is not the only lens through which we should understand the condition of the Muslim world. The myopia with which the West tends to view Muslims, particularly after the 9/11 attacks, does a great disservice to the historic changes that are taking place in Asia, home to the majority of Muslims.

The largest Muslim nation in the world is Indonesia. 250 million citizens living in a democratic, stable and peaceful society. Turkey provides another example of substantial import. The consolidation of democratic forces in Turkey as demonstrated by the summer 2007 elections represents a seminal victory of the forces of freedom and democracy which serves as an example for the entire Muslim world.

I believe that in this grand scheme the proponents of dialogue on each side can seek each other out to air common perspectives on the problems facing humankind and I for one have dedicated much of my time in the past two years to ensuring that these conversations do take place.

I see Muslims fairing well in 2008 and beyond so long as they move their countries towards democratic forms of governance and resist the resort to militancy when dialogue and engagement, democracy and debate, are the superior means to solution of their problems. I would urge Muslims to remember that the brightest periods of Muslim history were ones when their libraries were filled to overflowing with the books and thought that have helped speed the progress of mankind. Those were periods of symbiosis rather than seclusion, curiosity rather than petrifaction, and belief in the value of intellectual and moral enlightenment rather than in solipsism and soliloquy. We have to reach out in quest of our common humanity. Failure to do so is the sure road to perdition.

PETALING JAYA, Malaysia — Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim, the former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, will deliver a keynote address entitled “Challenges and Opportunities for Peace” at the International Conference on Peace in Mumbai, India on December 1, 2007, where over 20,000 participants are expected to hear from speakers from over 10 countries.

The conference will consider the topic of peace from exoteric and esoteric perspectives. Individual peace and spiritual calmness will be discussed as well as global peace and harmony in the context of the relationship between Islam and the West.

The conference will also promote greater awareness of Islam and a peaceful way of life and address issues of Islamophobia that are now prevalent in many ci rcles.

Dato Seri Anwar’s delegation to India includes Omar Jaafar, Former registrar of the International Islamic University of Malaysia and KeADILan party leader and Zamri Yusuf, head of KeADILan in the Malaysian state of Kedah.

BALI, Indonesia – In the worldwide marketplace of ideas, everything has a measure of value, even a bad idea.

A bad idea can sometimes even illuminate the darkest landscape of truth with brilliant flair – and in a way that mere fact cannot. Consider, for example, the idea that Islam is incompatible with democracy. It’s a really bad idea – but it can serve a very good purpose.

For starters, the proposition of Islamic incompatibility with democracy can motivate the most moderate and courteous Muslim to abandon his cool demeanor and mount a defense of his religion and culture with winning passion and charming conviction.

That’s exactly what happened here when the incomparable and charismatic Anwar Ibrahim took the floor at “The Asian Century Begins,” a three-day conference organized by the International Association of Political Consultants.

Anwar — a devout and learned Muslim – served as Malaysia’s deputy prime minister from 1993-98, and then served a few years in the slammer as a Malaysian political prisoner. Pardoned after a change in national administration, this reformer, who now bodes to re-enter elective politics in his country, is virtually evangelical about the need for – and achievability of — harmonious East-West relations.

And his country, just like Indonesia, while largely Muslim, sports a government structure that is entirely secular. What was so striking and fascinating about this conference is the number of attending Muslim VIPs who were so adamant about and proud of their secular governments. “The Islam-incompatibility question could very well be whether Christianity and democracy are really compatible,” almost thundered Anwar, a thoughtful type who rarely thunders. “Or why not ask whether Judaism and democracy are compatible! Why do we only look for Islamicists as scapegoats?”

The way Anwar and many other Muslims see things, people who assume that Islam inevitably degrades into extremism are bigots and/or ignoramuses. They point to Turkey and to Indonesia as prime examples of monster Muslim societies that are seriously secular polities. They point out that Islamicists in Southeast Asia have never had a quarrel with secularism. “And there is absolutely no serious debate in Indonesia over secular democracy,” insists Anwar.

The Malaysian political superstar then surprised everyone by pointing to an otherwise discredited source as major inspiration for Indonesia’s contemporary insistence on non-religious government. “Give Suharto credit for making Muslims accept the need for a secular state. Even the young leaders of Indonesia believe in the value of the secular state.”

Former President Suharto, now in increasingly failing health and entirely out of power, ruled sprawling Indonesia, once a Dutch duchy, for 30-plus years, until 1998, with both an iron will and an apparently bottomless lust for wealth. The well-known Transparency International once rated him number-one among all the world’s dictators for corruption.

But among businessmen, Suharto is regarded as the father of economic modernization, bringing new wealth to this former tropic of economic disaster. And among the country’s countless moderate Muslims, Suharto is appreciated for keeping the country’s crazies under wraps while letting sensible entrepreneurs do their thing and develop the economy. “Suharto gave his country 30-plus years of non-debate about the importance of secularism,” explains Anwar.

But what about those Muslims – however small a minority, whether in Indonesia or elsewhere – who preach the poison of exclusion, turn themselves into human bombs, or fly civilian aircraft into very tall and prominent buildings?

“Some Muslims need to listen better,” he says. “The true road for political Islam goes through [a place like] Jakarta. The threat to democracy is not from Islam .but we must avoid narrow interpretations of Sharia [Islamic law].”

Anwar also prays that secularism advocates won’t make the mistake of packaging the religiously-neutral governance philosophy as an anti-religious movement: “A secular state can be religion-friendly and acceptable to Muslim populations. Building a pious society is necessary – even as the state remains religiously neutral.”

Today Indonesia – the most populous Muslim state and in fact the fourth most populous country in the world – looks, more and more, to be a pivotal, unfolding story that may well serve to illuminate the entire direction of this century. For if Anwar and his merry band of moderate Muslims are right, then the relationship between East and West could prove less a collisioncourse than a trans-civilizational march of progress.

Alas, not enough Westerners appear to comprehend that the Islamic world is not Bin Laden’s for the taking, unless the majority moderates lose their grip and people like Anwar are kept from power – or unless the West so continually and stubbornly paints Islam in fiery stereotypes that the propaganda paint job turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy and we wind up convincing them that they all need to pack a gun.

Lingam: I put him up there. Don't tell this, please. I cannot tell this to Manjit. And he is acting President Court of Appeals Number 2 post. He is next Chief Justice. He always says "I leave it to you."

[Off Camera Voice]: I thought you were very close to Tun Eusoff Chin, Datuk?

[Off Camera Voice]: Because you know I...I...I..as far as I know you are veryâ€¦

Lingam: Eusoff Chin and I are extremely close. Because you know...Yeah. Eusoff Chin in power, I can straight and get in Pom! Pom! Pom! Pom! But now Dzaiddin is there. So Dzaiddin is attacking our cases. That means what? James Kumar is aligned to Dzaiddin. But Dzaiddin is retiring in 15th of September. He is finished.

[Off camera voice]: Next year?

Lingam: So Dzaiddin really wants to go...Don't worry. Dzaiddin recommended Malik Ahmad to be Chief Judge of Malaya. But we went and "cut" "cut" cut" cut" I and Tengku Adnan and Vincent told PM. I stop him for now, because he is anti-PM. We put Fairuz in. And we put...I told you three months ago he became CJM [Chief Justice Malaya]. He said "Don't believe." Then he got it. He rang up to thank me. And all that. He now acting PCA because Wan Adnan is sick. Right? This. Apart from law knowledge you need kow tow. Please understand that. You need to know the emperor. Knowing the law doesn't give you

The winning formula, you must also kow tow to the emperor. Correct or not? So now I am working very hard. So he agreed to meet Vincent Tan and PM andâ€¦what you call Tengku Adnan.

Off camera voice]: Do you think Vincent has an interest over PM?

Lingam: You don't know about the history. Businesswise may not be successful. Robert Kuok is very brilliant. Lim Goh Tong is very rich. Vincent Tan, you know what PM say? He went to Averton he went to Langkawi. He said bincang. I want you to build a hotel here. His wife pulled him away. [Inaudible] He said Dato Seri I will think about it. The wife pulled him away. There is another [inaudible] cannot get a bank loan. Vincent there. Vincent, can you build a hotel? Ready for next Air show?

I want you do it in 6 months. `Datuk Seri, Don't worry, I will get it done.' He paid double the price to get all of them. A big loss lah. Then Solomon Island and Fiji and all, he said, Vincent go and invest there, he went and bought...[inaudible] the government factory [inaudible] you do this project a bit and cover up your loss. PM will do what he want to do to cover your backside.

[Off camera voice]: Vincent is very close to him.

Lingam: That's right. Don't askâ€¦ because Vincent has taken me to PM's residenceâ€¦ the house ... [inaudible]... Anwar's caseâ€¦ the lawyersâ€¦Wee Cheong ... [inaudible]. But I cannot go and talk to PM just like that and say promote this and thatâ€¦

Because ah, he knowsâ€¦ I am aâ€¦ but when PM calls me on Anwar's case, I can tell himâ€¦ he'll listenâ€¦But if I go promote so and so, that means I got interest. So, I don't do that. I use Vincent and Tengku, go and do that. I don't f*** them up. They go

and do that. But I tell you this lah. Don't tell in front of people, of course. Life, one thing go confidential wrong is dangerous. Ah. Never, never sayâ€¦You shouldâ€¦ never. Even though to PM. You should never say. I don't know. I always say "I don't know." That's all.

[Off camera voice]: Everybody... I think many people know. Even the son case, everything I talk the father, â€¦. Talk until he agreed.

Lingam: You know me [inaudible]. But I never talk about it. Even the son's case, I do everything. I talk to the father...Talk until he agreed. But if it is a big crisis that affects him, â€¦.I can talk, he will listen. But if I want to favour somebody, that I cannot guarantee. Because my interest is not his interest. You know what I mean. Tomorrow invest your interest involving your father, I can come say this this this, you will listen. But tomorrow I appeal for me, you are not obliged to listen. Because you are a politician, PM. Politician is what is your interest, not what is my interest. But if I am giving advise on your interest, you will listen. On my interest, you will not. You must be careful about this.

[Off camera voice]: Datuk, I need to ask you this question.

Lingam: Ask me. Ask me.

[Off camera voice]: For a while nowâ€¦

Lingam: Because we can talk behind these people.

[Off camera voice]... Actually, I think, you know, Daim has more equity interest in Berjaya than Vincent Tan, isn't that true?

Lingam: Let me tell you something ... [inaudible] was bought by Daim ... [inaudible]. Later on he did some deals where Daim supposed to help him. One or two he helped. Supposed to give him some money. Didn't give. Part was paid, part not paid. Later on Daim called up and he got paid.

(Parts are slightly inaudible. This transcript may not be entirely accurate.)

Lingam: The CJ (Chief Justice - judiciary’s No 1 post) said his relative is now the Agong, so he wants to stay on to 68, so, Tengku Adnan said - I told Tengku Adnan, yesterday I had a meeting with him - he said PM is already very angry with him … and … he said no problem, he is going to make you acting err… confirm your position as PCA (President of Court of Appeal – judiciary’s No 2), working very hard, and then get Tan Sri Mokhtar as CJM (Chief Judge of Malaya – judiciary’s No 3).

Ah, so we just keep it confidential. I am working very hard on it. Then there is a letter, according to Tengku - I am going to see him tomorrow - there is a letter sent to … ah … CJ - I mean Tan Sri Dzaiddin - that Datuk Heliliah, …er Datuk Ramli and Datuk Maarop be made judges, and he rejected that Dr Andrew Chew and apa itu Zainudin Ismail lah because Zainuddin Ismail who condemned your appointment and Tan Sri Mohtar’s appointment.

And then you also, it seems, wrote a letter for the remaining … confirmed as judges. As per our memo, I discussed with Tun Eusoff Chin and we sent the same memo to PM. I just want to get a copy letter that this has been done.

And then Tan Sri Dzaiddin said he is going to recommend six people for the Court of Appeal, but until today the letter hasn’t come to PM. He never discussed, but neither he has sent the letter to PM. He has not sent. So, I know it is under the constitution, for judges all, that is your job, Datuk, to send, but we don’t want to make it an issue now.

Ah, okay. Actually I told Tengku Adnan to inform PM, PM to call you for a meeting. But I will organise this so that Tengku Adnan will call you directly. And then I got your number, I will tell him to call you directly to for you to meet PM lah. Ah… So should be okay, then ar… correct, correct, it is very important that the key players must be there.

Correct, correct, correct. Correct, correct. You know that the same problem that Tun Eusoff Chin had. He tried to do all this and yet he has run out of soldiers. He couldn’t do it because many were from the other camp. Last time was unfortunate because Tun Daim was doing everything sabotaging, you know lah…

Otherwise how are things with you - everything is okay? No, don’t worry. You know sometimes Tan Sri Vincent said that half the time we are talking about judiciary rather than doing the work. But if I don’t do this part, my work will be useless. Ha! Ha! Ha!

Ah, yes. Correct, correct, correct, correct, correct. Right, right, right. Correct. Ah. Ah. Right! Susah. You see he has now asked for six Court of Appeal judges, so that he can put his men before he retires.

Ah, never mind, I will do this, I will get er… Tengku Adnan to arrange for PM to call you and Tan Sri Vincent Tan for PM to call. You know why, actually, I am very grateful to Tan Sri Vincent Tan, You know why? I brainwashed him so much I even quarreled with him.

One day I went to Vincent Tan’s house, I fired him at night in his house. I said bloody hell, if you don’t do this who will do it? All these people, Tun Eusoff Chin, Datuk Ahmad Fairuz, Tan Sri Zainal all fought for …that. Then he called Tengku Adnan. Tengku Adnan he said, saya bukan Perdana Menteri Malaysia lah, you know. If the old man doesn’t want to listen to me, go to hell.

He quarreled with me. I said never mind, never mind, Tan Sri, you talk to PM again tomorrow morning to put Datuk Ahmad Fairuz to CJM. So next day morning he went and he called me back 9.30 that he said PM has already agreed. So I said never mind, we hope for the best. So I said no harm trying, the worst that it can happen is you lose.

Being the old man, he is 76 years old, he gets whispers everywhere, and then you don’t whisper, he get taken away by the other side. But, now the PM is very alert because every time he gets letters from Tan Sri Dzaiddin, he calls Tengku Adnan, he says discuss with Vincent, come and discuss. And…

Yes, yes, ya. Correct, correct. Ya, but you see although I know PM, but my views … I am a lawyer in practice… my views are… I go through them, I go through them lah.

Ah. Ah. Ah. Ah.

And then Dzaiddin will go and tell them you went and saw PM and make a big issue out of it. Oh ya, I think so, I think so.

Now I heard Raja Aziz, Raja Aziz ah, two weeks ago spoke to my lawyer Thayalan, and another lawyer Anad, in the High Court - they have a case with each other. So, Thayalan and Anad asked Raja Aziz, how is Tan Sri Wan Adnan?

He said he is on his way down. But you know what is the shocking thing he said? Datuk Fairuz became CJM. He overruled everybody, in three months time, he is going to be PCA, and six months time, he is going to be CJ. He said I can’t take this shock. He told lah. Ha!

It seems ah that they are going to organise a campaign … they are going to organise a campaign to run you down. But you just keep quiet - don’t say anything. Don’t … even the press ask, you said I leave it to God, that’s all. Don’t say. I really like your message. You said I work very hard, what can I do? I leave it to God. That’s the best answer, Datuk, that you can ever give. Ah.

Yes… I will also get Tan Sri to remind PM to put a Tan Sri ship this year lah. You know, this will elevate you, you know.

Don’t worry, we organise this. And if Tan Sri Vincent and Tengku Adnan want to meet you privately, they will, I will call you. We organise a private arrangement, in a very neutral place.

No, don’t worry, Datuk, I know how much you suffered for Tun Eusoff Chin. And Tun said Datuk Ahmad Fairuz 110 percent loyalty. We want to make sure our friends are there for the sake of PM and for the sake of the country. Not for our own interest, not for our own interest. We want to make sure the country comes out well.

Well, you suffered so much, so much you have done - for the election petition, Wee Choo Keong, everything. How much, nobody would have done all these.

Yes, you know. Ah. Good lah. You don’t worry. I am constantly working on this. I…

Ya, ya, don’t worry, don’t worry. We work hard on this er Datuk. And if Tan Sri Vincent and Tengku want to see you, I will organise it in a confidential place.

Okay, Datuk, all the very best. God bless you and your family.

Okay. Thank you, thank you. Bye-bye, bye-bye.

[Off Camera Voice]: Who is that Dato?

Lingam: Chief Justice Malaya.

[Off Camera Voice]: Who is that?

Lingam: Dato Ahmad Fairuz

[Off camera voice]: Oh Ahmad Fairuz.

Lingam: I put him up there. Don’t tell this, please. I cannot tell this to Manjit. And he is acting President Court of Appeals Number 2 post. He is next Chief Justice. He always says “I leave it to you.”

[Off Camera Voice]: I thought you were very close to Tun Eusoff Chin, Datuk?

[Off Camera Voice]: Because you know I…I…I..as far as I know you are very…

Lingam: Eusoff Chin and I are extremely close. Because you know…Yeah. Eusoff Chin in power, I can straight and get in Pom! Pom! Pom! Pom! But now Dzaiddin is there. So Dzaiddin is attacking our cases. That means what? James Kumar is aligned to Dzaiddin. But Dzaiddin is retiring in 15th of September. He is finished.

[Off camera voice]: Next year?

Lingam: So Dzaiddin really wants to go…Don’t worry. Dzaiddin recommended Malik Ahmad to be Chief Judge of Malaya. But we went and “cut” “cut” cut” cut” I and Tengku Adnan and Vincent told PM. I stop him for now, because he is anti-PM. We put Fairuz in. And we put…I told you three months ago he became CJM [Chief Justice Malaya]. He said “Don’t believe.” Then he got it. He rang up to thank me. And all that. He now acting PCA because Wan Adnan is sick. Right? This. Apart from law knowledge you need kow tow. Please understand that. You need to know the emperor. Knowing the law doesn’t give you the winning formula, you must also kow tow to the emperor. Correct or not? So now I am working very hard. So he agreed to meet Vincent Tan and PM and…what you call Tengku Adnan.

[Off camera voice]: Do you think Vincent has an interest over PM?

Lingam: You don’t know about the history. Businesswise may not be successful. Robert Kuok is very brilliant. Lim Goh Tong is very rich. Vincent Tan, you know what PM say? He went to Averton he went to Langkawi. He said bincang. I want you to build a hotel here. His wife pulled him away. [Inaudible] He said Dato Seri I will think about it. The wife pulled him away. There is another [inaudible] cannot get a bank loan. Vincent there. Vincent, can you build a hotel? Ready for next Air show?

I want you do it in 6 months. `Datuk Seri, Don’t worry, I will get it done.’ He paid double the price to get all of them. A big loss lah. Then Solomon Island and Fiji and all, he said, Vincent go and invest there, he went and bought…[inaudible] the government factory [inaudible] you do this project a bit and cover up your loss. PM will do what he want to do to cover your backside.

[Off camera voice]: Vincent is very close to him.

Lingam: That’s right. Don’t ask… because Vincent has taken me to PM’s residence… the house … [inaudible]… Anwar’s case… the lawyers…Wee Cheong … [inaudible]. But I cannot go and talk to PM just like that and say promote this and that…

Because ah, he knows… I am a… but when PM calls me on Anwar’s case, I can tell him… he’ll listen…But if I go promote so and so, that means I got interest. So, I don’t do that. I use Vincent and Tengku, go and do that. I don’t f*** them up. They go

and do that. But I tell you this lah. Don’t tell in front of people, of course. Life, one thing go confidential wrong is dangerous. Ah. Never, never say…You should… never. Even though to PM. You should never say. I don’t know. I always say “I don’t know.” That’s all.

[Off camera voice]: Everybody… I think many people know. Even the son case, everything I talk the father, …. Talk until he agreed.

Lingam: You know me [inaudible]. But I never talk about it. Even the son’s case, I do everything. I talk to the father…Talk until he agreed. But if it is a big crisis that affects him, ….I can talk, he will listen. But if I want to favour somebody, that I cannot guarantee. Because my interest is not his interest. You know what I mean. Tomorrow invest your interest involving your father, I can come say this this this, you will listen. But tomorrow I appeal for me, you are not obliged to listen. Because you are a politician, PM. Politician is what is your interest, not what is my interest. But if I am giving advise on your interest, you will listen. On my interest, you will not. You must be careful about this.

[Off camera voice]: Datuk, I need to ask you this question.

Lingam: Ask me. Ask me.

[Off camera voice]: For a while now…

Lingam: Because we can talk behind these people.

[Off camera voice]:… Actually, I think, you know, Daim has more equity interest in Berjaya than Vincent Tan, isn’t that true?

Lingam: Let me tell you something … [inaudible] was bought by Daim … [inaudible]. Later on he did some deals where Daim supposed to help him. One or two he helped. Supposed to give him some money. Didn’t give. Part was paid, part not paid. Later on Daim called up and he got paid.

Ewan_sn

Dec 27 2007, 07:38 AM

Pertahan Kesaksamaan RakyatBy Anwar Ibrahim

Tickler:In another estate area with almost 600 Indian flood victims, the UMNO ‘volunteers’ delivered just one sack of rice to be shared by 600 Indian estate workers and their children. Many of the Indian estate women became hysterical and screamed how 600 people were going to share one bag of rice.http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/index.p...2&Itemid=36

Yen:I appeal to Sdr Anwar Ibrahim to constantly moderate the over enthusiastic Indians by reminding them to give their support and you as a Leader will do the fighting for them and for all Malaysians alike.We must not let a small group of crooks,hooligans and gangsters to hijack our dream to see you become the prime minister of Malaysia.We must not resort to anything illegal which can give BN an excuse to advantage off. BN is a well oiled machinery and it has the financial muscle to do what it wants.

Keadilan has struck deal to split electoral seats, says Anwar, who is prepared to contest in by-elections

Nazry Bahrawi

AMID rising election fever in Malaysia, opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim (picture) yesterday offered friends and foes a sneak preview of his party’s game plan — which includes a deal with a key opposition party.

Mr Anwar announced that after months of negotiations, his Keadilan party had finalised a deal with the Chinese-based Democratic Action Party (DAP) to divide the electoral seats between them in Penang.

“Nobody believed that it could be reached and we have reached it early enough, long before the resolution by Parliament on elections,” Mr Anwar said at a press conference here, on the sidelines of the Regional Outlook Forum 2008 organised by the Institute of South-east Asian Studies (Iseas).

Mr Anwar added that he was confident that the opposition parties would turn in a good showing during the general election.

“Objectively, if the election is free and fair, we will produce a very impressive performance. I have no doubt about that,” said Mr Anwar, who has been using his overseas trips to publicise his political views.

An Indonesian television station came under fire recently by Malaysia’s Information Minister Zainuddin Maidin for airing an interview with Mr Anwar.

Mr Anwar’s optimistic assessment came despite the fact that his Keadilan party failed to defeat the ruling Barisan Nasional in a closely-fought by-election in the small constituency of Ijok last April.

In that contest, Keadilan managed to net only about 5 per cent of votes from ethnic Indians in the Indian-majority constituency.

But Mr Anwar believes that the Indian community’s dissatisfaction with the government — embodied by the street protests organised by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) last November — is likely to translate into greater support from Indian voters for his party.

“I don’t believe anyone in the right sense could now accept the fact that Indian support for the government will be 90 per cent, ” said Mr Anwar.

Referring to the Ijok by-election, he added: “Then, 50 per cent of the Malays were with us, 60 per cent of the Chinese were with us, and 5 per cent of the Indians … Now we can sustain the Indians, the Chinese and the Malays.”

But even as he acknowledged that his party needs “to work harder” to reach out to Malays in the deep rural heartlands, Mr Anwar said he is also encouraged by the enthusiastic response he has received from the “Malay urban and general rural population” during his visits to states such as Johor.

Apart from Penang, Mr Anwar said that Keadilan is also eyeing Selangor, Perak and Sabah.

But his party will stay clear of Terengganu and Kelantan since they are “essentially PAS (Parti Islam SeMalaysia) bastions”, Mr Anwar said.

He also unveiled his back-up plan — to contest in a by-election in the event that the polls take place before April 15.

Mr Anwar is barred by the law from running for political office until this April because of his six-year jail sentence for corruption.

When asked which seat he is eyeing, Mr Anwar, to laughter, replied coyly: “A safe seat.”

But he added: “For people like me who prefer a multi-religious, multi-racial agenda, it would be better to possibly choose a constituency that has that demographical bone of Malays, Chinese and Indians.”

Some analysts feel that Mr Anwar may be painting too optimistic a picture of the opposition’s chances in the coming polls.

Malaysian political scientist Dr Chandra Muzaffar of Universiti Sains Malaysia described Mr Anwar’s assertion on being able to secure the Indian and Chinese votes as “a pipe dream”.

While it may be possible that support for the Barisan Nasional from both ethnic groups to “come down a little” from the 2004 election results, Dr Chandra does not believe that “the erosion will be significant”.

But Dr Ooi Kee Beng of Iseas said it is possible for the opposition parties to turn in a good showing if they can show themselves to be united.

Although he said that Mr Anwar could be “over-optimistic” about his predictions, Dr Ooi thought the opposition leader’s plan for a by-election “sounds like a clever enough strategy to counter his weakness that he can’t contest before April”.

In Kuala Lumpur, Umno Youth deputy chief Khairy Jamaluddin called on Malaysians to stop speculation on when the general election would be held, saying that only Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had the right to comment on the election date.

He has been asked what kind of perfume he uses, and who styles his hair.

But despite receiving such “embarrassing” questions by young adults over Facebook, Mr Anwar told reporters that taking his campaign online where he could engage in interactive exchanges has been “useful”. Besides Facebook. Mr Anwar said he also keeps Friendster and MySpace accounts.

The opposition leader also maintains a blog that is entirely penned in the Malay language as a means of reaching out to Malay voters.

Lingam: The constitution judges said the constitution said, in the opinion of the prime minister he recommend. Who the prime minister recommend? So you are Dzaiddin, you are chief justice, you recommend 10 names, I consent, I said I want these 15 names, can’t do anything. He recommend to rulers, rulers only consulted, not approve, only consult. You Know?

[Voice off-camera]: Because if it goes up to the Court of Appeal…

Lingam: Now Dzaiddin wants to come through the PM because he wants his Tun-ship. So…he doing everything to please the PM lah, but he recommended five judges, three…three approved, which is Tun Eusoff Chin’s men, two not Eusoff Chin’s men which we objected. I prepared the report and rejected… but he wants to appeal again lah.

[Voice off-camera]: Can he appeal?

Lingam: He can appeal lah, but will be rejected lah.

[Voice off-camera]: I never know appointment can be rejected you know?

Lingam: No, recommendation can be rejected. The PM shall recommend so and so, after consulting so and so. So, PM suppose to consult Loh Mui Fah before he recommends. So Loh Mui Fah recommend 10 names, he in fact can say I disagree with your 10 names, I recommend Gurm…Lingam and so and so. Nothing you can do. You are only…you are supposed to be consulted, not to be approved. You see the point or not? The constitution said consult. I suppose to consult my father before I marry, I consulted him, he disagreed but still I married!

[Voice off-camera]: Because that is not final, ah.

Lingam: Right, consult is to discuss. That’s all. But if I must get my father’s approval before married, then different. Approval different from consult.

[Voice off-camera]: So, who is the lord president now?

Lingam: Now chief justice Dzaiddin.

[Voice off-camera]: Dzaiddin…

Lingam: But between you and me. We have taken Dzaiddin for dinner three times.

[Voice off-camera]: Three times already.

Lingam: And we have given him the most expensive gift. Don’t ask about it lah. I have given him and Vincent Tan has given him. So, he also cannot attack us. Tomorrow we go say we give you this this this. He cannot go and say you are a agent. Correct or not? So, he is neither here nor there lah. That’s all.

[Voice off-camera]: But… Chief Justice..

Lingam: But in the court when I argue with him. He said, Datuk Lingam you said you will take one hour. I said, my Lord, it is only 50 minutes, I got another 10 minutes. But…I appreciate. Thank you, thank you… He is very nice with me, very polite with me. I have been sending cakes every hari raya. Vincent has been sending. He can’t go and say he is very clean, correct or not?

[Voice off-camera]: But then he is…

Lingam: But he is playing his game lah. He got the job, that’s it. Now, September he is finished that’s all. Make sure he is not extended.

[Voice off-camera]: But, he may ask for extension.

Lingam: He is hoping… he told somebody that he likes the job very much. Then he likes…Let him dream lah.

[Voice off-camera]: Above him is the Lord President?

Lingam: He is the number one man, Dzaiddin.

[Voice off-camera]: Whose the Lord President?

Lingam: He is called… those days called lord president, now called chief justice, federal court.

[Voice off-camera]: Oh… it is the same title.

Lingam: Number two President Court of Appeal, that Wan Adnan, my personal friend. He was sick. Nobody knows he is close to me. Right, in fact, he never knew his name is going up until I told him. Then number three, Ahmad Fairuz, Chief Judge Malaya. Ahmad Fairuz is going to be acting, now acting…number two. Right? So, next minute, even Raja Aziz said he is going to be the next top job. He is…definitely number one lah. So, he told me I leave it all to you and you must help me and all…I said I’ll arrange for you to meet Tengku Adnan, Vincent and meet with PM lah…But this bugger is sometimes a bit scared. Ah…I must play shadow from the behind. Nobody should know I know you. Then you can help more. But people, see you know more, like Eusoff Chin, because I met him in New Zealand, became a problem. But if I didn’t meet him in New Zealand, it’s a… no problem. Correct or not? Unfortunate.

[Voice off-camera]: Then, in your…then they said you have taken photograph with him holidaying in…huh…huh…

Lingam: But unfortunately, I didn’t know. The worst thing I didn’t know Eusoff Chin put his hand like that! Alamak…so…I also didn’t know about it. What to do?

[Voice off-camera]: Then… then…

Lingam: Do you know, today one o’clock, Eusoff Chin having lunch in his house today. Hari Raya today. He called me and my wife to come. I told him we don’t go today, we make it another day. I don’t come but my wife and children will come. You know or not?I told my wife to call…[unclear]… [phone rings]…

Lingam: Hello…Joe Ah…!

Note: Because some parts of the recording are inaudible the transcript may not be 100% accurate.

The Haidar Commission in ruling not to admit evidence on fixing of court decisions has severely affected public confidence that the present administration is serious in restoring the rule of law in Malaysia.

It is disappointing to note that the Haidar Commission has ruled that I need not be called to provide evidence of corruption as indicated in the synopsis of my statement to be given to the Haidar Commission. I am certain that the evidence that I can give will be of significant assistance to the Haidar Commission to get the truth behind this dark patch in Malaysian judicial history.

The decision by the Commission to arbitrarily disallow me to testify would certainly lead one to the conclusion that some unseen hand is at work. This hand is so powerful that the Commission will stop at nothing to prevent me from giving evidence, even though the evidence concerned will definitely shed light on the testimony given so far. Instead of seizing the opportunity of the Inquiry to find the underlying cause of this scandal, the Commissioners, (in particular the Chairman Tan Sri Haidar), have chosen to fetter themselves with procedural legalities and restrictive interpretations as to what they can do and what they cannot do.

The purpose and objective of the Enquiry is to assure both the Malaysian public and foreigners that judges in Malaysia dispense justice without fear or favour. Unfortunately, instead of adopting a robust approach to surgically remove the cancer of corruption in the judiciary in all its forms, the Commissioners adopt at a restricted interpretation of its term of reference and thereby exclude investigation into the most malignant form of corruption that decisions of the Courts in Malaysia can be fixed. The crux of the matter is that the Lingam video shows that persons who are likely to be corruptible or are corrupted are appointed or promoted as judges. The Commissioners have fallen into serious error in only allowing evidence of brokering of judges’ appointments without allowing evidence of corruption to be admitted.

I had prior to the setting up of the Royal Commission warned that the terms of reference of the Enquiry must be sufficiently wide and clear to ensure that the public interests is served. This was not done. As a result of the poorly drafted and restrictive terms of reference, the Commissioners have now made a manifest error.

Obviously, in pursuing this farcical approach to justice, the Commission has not only deprived itself of the opportunity to get a better picture of the true state of affairs but is wittingly or unwittingly become complicit in the obstruction of justice. I use this term not in the restrictive legal context but in a wider ethical and moral context taking into account the legitimate expectations of the people. And it is the legitimate expectation of the people that the proceedings of the Inquiry be conducted so that justice is not only done but seen to be done.

I also call upon Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to take immediate action by providing a clarification on the terms of reference to ensure that evidence of corruption including the fixing of decisions beginning from the time of the sacking of the former Lord President, Tun Salleh Abbas be admitted in the ongoing Enquiry.

If the government is serious about combating corruption as well as restoring confidence in the judiciary, this is the opportunity for it to prove itself. Rather than just paying lip service to the principles of accountability and transparency, the Prime Minister should take decisive and firm action to bring to justice all those responsible, how high they may be, for corrupting the administration of justice in this country.

I urge Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to act immediately in order that Malaysians and the international community can be assured that his administration is serious in combating corruption and is genuine in wanting to uphold the rule of law.

Prime Minister Abdullah’s claim that Malaysia is currently ranked 8th in the world in terms of competitiveness is deliberately misleading.

Closer examination of the data reveals that this is true only within the category of countries with a population of 20 million or more.

According to the full World Competitiveness Report 2007 as cited by the Prime Minister, Malaysia is in fact ranked only 23rd in the world. Fifteen of the twenty-two countries ranked above Malaysia in 2007 have populations of less than 20 million people, while seven of the twenty-two have populations exceeding 20 million.

Malaysia’s competitiveness ranking in 2006 was 22nd, and in 1997, it was 17th.

Prime Minister Abdullah’s decision to resort to such misdirection is a weak attempt to hide the fact that Malaysia’s economic fundamentals have weakened progressively under his government.

Malaysia’s competitiveness is plumetting and where once our economy stood shoulder to shoulder with countries like Singapore and Hong Kong, we are now ranked 23rd in the world, they are ranked 2nd and 3rd respectively.

We are clearly in need of a higher calibre of leadership if Malaysia is to realise its full potential as an economy of global stature.

Less than 10 years ago former Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim was languishing in prison, suffering from arsenic poisoning surreptitiously introduced into his drinking water. Mr. Anwar was sacked after challenging the rule of then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed. Jailed on what he claimed to be politically motivated charges of sodomy and corruption, not only was Mr. Anwar¹s political career apparently over, but his life was in danger. Only after his family secretly smuggled blood samples out of the country to confirm the poisoning were steps taken to ensure his health.

Fast forward to March 8, 2008. Even though he remains unable to stand for election until April of 2008 due to his previous incarceration, the Anwar-led opposition coalition dealt a stunning blow to the ruling Barisan National (BN) Party, breaking its decades-old super majority control of parliament. To call it a ³comeback² would be an understatement. While the BN continues to hold a simple majority, a tectonic shift has taken place in Malaysian politics, and it was in many ways engineered by Mr. Anwar.

The last time the ruling BN party failed to secure a super majority in parliament was 1969. Following the elections, Chinese celebrations sparked race riots that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of individuals. This national trauma catalyzed the establishment of a controversial race-based system of governance rooted in a New Economic Policy (NEP) that gave preferential treatment to the majority Malay Muslim community. A tenuous arrangement with minority Chinese and Indian groups held the country together since that time, mostly under the rule of Mahathir Mohamed whose aggressive economic growth strategies propelled Malaysia into the third largest economy in Southeast Asia.

Overtime, however, political progress failed to keep pace with economic development. While the largest building in the world was constructed in Kuala Lumpur, political power continued to rest almost entirely along sectarian racial and religious lines. The BN remained unchallenged by a weak opposition incapable of organizing against the status quo. Corruption, mismanagement and concentration of wealth set in. The ruling party had almost complete control over the media, public gatherings, special security laws and other government apparatus.

A number of factors contributed to rising discontent amongst Malaysians across racial divides, including rising crime, a slowing economy, a number of very public corruption scandals and increased oil prices. In addition, increasing discontent emanated from the minority Chinese and Indian communities over the pro-Malay NEP. The BN, now led by Mahathir¹s hand-picked successor Abdullah Badawi, recognized its support amongst Chinese and Indians would weaken, but expected that Malay support would remain strong so as to ensure pro-Malay policies.

This was a serious miscalculation. Not only did Chinese and Indians voters flock to the polls in support of the opposition, a number of Malays followed suit. There was a growing realization amongst average Malays that benefits from the NEP seldom found their way to working class segments of the community. Foreign investment continued to decline. Malaysia used to be America¹s tenth largest trading partner. It is now number sixteen. While the economy continued to grow, fewer people were benefitting from the gains.

Therein lies Mr. Anwar¹s most significant contribution to Malaysia¹s political earthquake. He coalesced a fractured opposition movement around the elimination of race-based politics ­ and did so in such a manner that supporters of the ruling BN party felt no compulsion to turn to violence, as a number of them actually agreed with Mr. Anwar. The achievement was made nonetheless remarkable by the fact that he campaigned through a complete media black-out and relentless attacks on his character through state-controlled media, but continued to draw significant crowds in the tens of thousands across the country including in areas dominated by the rulingparty. The opposition¹s innovative use of Youtube and text-messaging no doubt played a role in this as well.

Mr. Anwar was able to broker a cooperative arrangement amongst three major opposition parties ­ the left leaning mostly Chinese DAP, the Malay Islamist PAS party and his own PKR multi-racial Justice Party - to challenge the BN one-to-one in each contest. The opposition was able to achieve what most said was impossible given the entrenched power of the ruling BN party; undercut BN support amongst Malays by appealing to their sense of justice and fairness.

Malaysia¹s race-based system was likely to give way sooner or later, however Mr. Anwar paved a path for peaceful transition by bringing his credibility as a Malay politician to the table while simultaneously assuring Chinese and Indians that their rights would be respected. He talked Malays into letting go of the fear that incited communal riots in 1969. It is no small feat to peacefully transition out of entrenched systems of entitlement. One need only review Iraq¹s unfortunate history since 2003 for an example of how such a process can be terribly mismanaged.

While the opposition victory is certainly critical for charting a more egalitarian future for Malaysia, it also bodes well for the development of Muslim democracy. The opposition coalition¹s orientation brought moderate elements from the Islamist PAS party forward. PAS even fielded a non-Muslim candidate, an unprecedented move in its history. Meanwhile, Badawi sought to leverage racial divide by appealing to Malays through increasingly Islamist rhetoric. His efforts were resoundingly rebuked. The election results demonstrate that the majority Muslim country is interested in exploring a system politics that does not discriminate based on race or religion.

A weakened BN party cannot be entirely attributed to Anwar Ibrahim¹s improbable political resurrection. However, he undoubtedly played a critical role in organizing the opposition and reasoning the Malay population through this transition. Political possibilities that were unthinkable last week in Malaysia are all of a suddenly on the table. Mr. Anwar refers to this reality as a new dawn for the country. If he is successful in accomplishing his stated goals, most fair-minded observers would have to agree.

Mr. Ahmad is an essayist based in Cambridge, Mass. His commentary and analysis has appeared in the Economist, the Washington Post and other publications on issues related to national and international politics.

Ewan_sn

Mar 20 2008, 10:35 AM

Liputan Newsweek: Back in the LightBy amita

Anwar 3 Artikel Dalam Newsweek:

1. Back In the Light2. Malaysia’s famous ex-prisoner on his astounding political rebirth.3. The Malaysian Race Card

Back In the Light

Purged, jailed and humiliated in the late 1990s, Anwar Ibrahim has staged a remarkable comeback at the helm of an opposition insurgency.

Anwar Ibrahim takes six calls in quick succession on three different mobile phones. Five days after Malaysia’s general election—in which his coalition shocked observers by winning several key states and almost ousting the long-ruling party—he has segued from surprise victor to tireless political operative, ironing out disagreements and building bridges within the still-fractious opposition. Inside his low-key suburban office, tucked several kilometers away from Parliament in leafy Kuala Lumpur, Anwar’s sense of purpose—destiny, even—is palpable. “Just listen to what the others have to say. Listen,” he tells one caller. “Stay calm, go home and have some dinner, some Panadol, whatever you need,” he tells another, adding, “If there are still strong views and you can’t solve it, let me handle [it].”

The performance is vintage Anwar: the great conciliator doing what he does best. Barely a decade ago, this was the man who was going to help Asia and the West see eye to eye and bridge the chasm between Islam and other faiths. As Finance minister and then deputy prime minister of Malaysia in the late 1990s, Anwar was heir apparent to the strongman Mahathir Mohammed. But it was always an odd pairing. Mahathir was an angry anti-colonialist, forever railing against the West; he denounced Western pressure for democracy and human rights as cultural imperialism, an affront to more authoritarian “Asian values,” and fiercely resisted international attempts to dismantle Malaysia’s cozy and corrupt business culture after the Asian financial crisis. Anwar, by contrast, was a proud universalist, a personally pious Muslim who was also a relentless modernizer and whose penchant for quoting Gandhi and declaring the necessity of democracy and economic openness won him international acclaim. In speeches filled with terms like “civil society” and “freedom,” Anwar opposed the notion that Asians were somehow destined for repressive rule and sought to turn regional vehicles like ASEAN into forces to promote liberty and justice. This won him widespread adoration—he was named NEWSWEEK’s Asian of the Year in 1998—and made him a darling of the Davos set.

But it also led to his downfall. By 1998, Mahathir had had enough of his high-flying deputy, and after Anwar publicly broke with his boss over the response to the Asian financial crisis (which Anwar hoped to use to impose fiscal discipline and dismantle Mahathir’s crony system), he was sacked and then jailed on what were widely seen as trumped-up corruption and sodomy charges. “It was a terrible time,” Anwar admits in a NEWSWEEK interview, but not one he is not eager to revisit. Asked about Mahathir, over whom he would appear to have scored a historic reversal of fortune, Anwar won’t take the bait, dismissing his former patron as old, ill and “not an issue for me … In order to succeed, we have to look beyond him.”

Under Malaysian law, Anwar is barred from holding office until April 15. Yet clearly the rising fortunes of his party make him once again a potential prime minister, though this time around his ambitions appear focused solely on Malaysia, not Asia and the world. Asked if he was poised once again to act as a bridge figure between East and West, Anwar embraced that “important role” as one he had been “playing for a long time,” but then quickly gave it a distinctly local focus: reassuring both Malays and non-Malays and getting them to work together in his party.

Thanks to widespread disgust with the lackluster performance of Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, the three-party opposition more than quadrupled its presence in Parliament (going from 20 to 82 seats out of 222), and it now controls five of Malaysia’s 13 states. The greater import is clear: even some members of Abdullah’s camp are now calling for his resignation, and “Anwar has returned as a major force,” says Bridget Welsh, a Southeast Asia expert at Johns Hopkins University in Washington.

But the opposition still has to parlay those results into effective control. For the moment, Abdullah remains in charge, if barely. Still, the election was a water- shed, the closest the ruling United Malays National Organization (UMNO) has come to defeat since independence in 1957. The best Abdullah could say about the drubbing was to call it “democracy at work,” and Mahathir, who retired in 2003, called it “shocking”—adding, suggestively, “The Japanese would have committed hara-kiri.”

The vote also represented a major challenge to Malaysia’s wide-ranging race-based affirmative-action program, which, under Mahathir gave the country’s ethnic Malay majority broad preferences over the long-dominant Chinese community in business affairs. Even if the fragile center now holds in Kuala Lumpur, UMNO will soon face unprecedented threats from state governments now controlled by the opposition. Following a pattern discernible elsewhere in Southeast Asia, Anwar and his allies are staging an assault on the cronyism and patronage of old and pledging social justice, openness, transparency, and anticorruption measures.

The new movement is something of a sequel to the failed Reformasi drive of the late 1990s. Launched by Anwar after his ouster in late 1998, it aimed to ignite a “people power” uprising of the sort that had toppled Suharto in Indonesia. But Reformasi fizzled after Anwar’s criminal conviction; he ultimately served six years in prison.

Yet Malaysians’ desire for change never died. Abdullah, handpicked by Mahathir on the assumption he’d be easy to control, actually took up the reform mantle himself at first, pledging sweeping change during the campaign of 2004. Abdullah vowed to promote moderate Islam to counter creeping fundamentalism, promised an anti-corruption campaign and suggested he might turn back Malaysia’s race-based development policies. Voters responded well, especially when, in 2005, he began dismantling massive Mahathir-era infrastructure projects. But the electorate slowly soured on the new leader as scandal and indecisiveness hobbled his administration. “He did not deliver effectively, and Malaysians called him on it,” says Welsh.

If anything, the opposition’s triumph was even more significant than the raw numbers indicate. Anwar’s People’s Justice Party grabbed 31 seats—up from just one in 2004—and its victors included his wife and daughter. Opposition candidates dominated in peninsular Malaysia’s west coast, seizing the key industrial states of Penang and Selangor. To reach voters, the opposition relied on bloggers, You-Tube and text messages sent to grass-roots organizers via cell phone: common tactics in places like Indonesia, Taiwan and South Korea but new to Malaysia. Indeed, they took UMNO and its National Front coalition so much by surprise that the opposition nearly won the election outright. Anwar, for one, thinks it could have; during his NEWSWEEK interview, he hinted at fraud connected to the use of mail-in votes and the Election Commission’s last-minute decision to scrap plans to stain the voters’ fingers with indelible ink.

The electorate also broke with the race-based voting patterns of old. Malaysia’s Chinese and Indian minorities, which make up a quarter and a tenth of the population, respectively, deserted government-allied ethnic parties in favor of Anwar’s Justice candidates and those of center-left Democratic Action Party. The rebellion of ethnic Indians was particularly dramatic; many quit the pro-government Malaysian Indian Congress and the MIC’s leader even lost his seat. “This is new territory” for the ruling party, says Garry Rodan, director of the Asia Research Centre at Murdoch University in Perth, Australia. “The [party’s] longstanding emphasis on ethnic identity to mask socioeconomic inequalities traversing ethnic groups has much less currency now.”

Anwar’s coalition deftly managed this feat by playing on one issue that united Malaysians whatever their race, sex or station: dismay at rising prices that have lead to hoarding of some staples like cooking oil. Jeff Ooi, a blogger turned parliamentary candidate, traded on this anger, writing in February that “now that the cost of living has gone up, unhappiness is fermenting.” By promising to raise the people’s concerns in Parliament, Ooi won a seat in Penang with an impressive 16,000-ballot margin (out of 46,000).

Now the opposition must quickly transform its promises into a cohesive strategy for governing. Given internal divisions, that won’t be easy; the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party wants to establish an Islamic state, while the secular, center-left Democratic Action Party wants to abolish pro-Malay preferences. These divisions kept the opposition from uniting during the last election, in 2004. But Anwar and his Justice Party are hoping to provide a bridge; in addition to controlling the most seats, his party sits between its partners on most issues. Anwar himself is working overtime to find common ground, using his charismatic magic on all parties. Before the election, he managed to persuade the three factions to divvy up constituencies so as to avoid splitting the vote, and ever since he’s been working his cell phones relentlessly, jawboning allies into submission. Though he lacks a formal position, Anwar hopes to enter Parliament soon: he plans to ask an ally to resign once his legal ban lifts, and then to run for the seat in a by-election.

Any number of things could disrupt his grand plans. His Islamic allies could prove too uncompromising, or Malaysia’s economy could deteriorate—something the newly empowered opposition might be blamed for. On the first trading day after the election, the Kuala Lumpur Composite Index fell by almost 10 percent, as investors dumped shares in companies with large government contracts.

Yet if he manages to hold on, Anwar’s comeback will offer a powerful lesson on the dangers of complacency for long-ruling parties throughout Asia. The 4 million citizens of neighboring Singapore, for example, are already watching events closely, and comparing UMNO’s fate to the city’s own dominant political machine. Abdullah’s shortcomings—scandals and political indecisiveness—have no obvious equivalents in Singapore. Yet UMNO’s surprise setback “holds a lesson” for the city-state, one reader argued in a letter to The Straits Times last week. “Democracy’s tool, the vote, is powerful and swift. A government chosen by its people must stay in touch with the ground. An incumbent who holds power for too long” could run into trouble fast if he becomes unresponsive, the writer warned.

That has been Anwar’s point since the 1990s. With his nemesis, Mahathir, now reduced to carping from the sidelines, and the government coalition looking shakier than ever before, Anwar has again illustrated the fact that when fed-up citizens demand sweeping change, they can accomplish it. Anwar, of course, still has to turn promises into reality. But he’s already made one thing very clear: if anyone can accomplish it, Anwar’s the man.

Anwar Ibrahim is, for the for the time being, barred from holding office in Malaysia thanks to a politically criminal conviction dating from 1999. But in the general election on March 8, his People’s Justice Party scored an unprecedented 31 seats in Malaysia’s Parliament, and the broader coalition he is building nearly won a majority, ousting the party than has ruled the country for 50 years. Ibrahim was Finance minister and then deputy to strongman Mahathir Mohamad before becoming Malaysia’s best-known political prisoner; as such, he has gotten used to great reversals in his life. He spoke with NEWSWEEK’s Lorien Holland at his office in Kuala Lumpur about his comeback, the opposition’s triumph and his own political ambitions. Excerpts:

Holland: Did the election results come as a surprise to you?Anwar: I was one of the small minority who believed we were doing well before the polls, so I was not that surprised. About three or four days before the election, [pro-government] newspapers were full of vicious personal attacks against me, so I knew things had to be going well, and that at that late stage the government was under siege.

What happened, exactly, on Election Day?This was a defining moment for Malaysia. Nothing is going to be the same anymore. It is not unrealistic to imagine that we could actually have won a majority right then. If it were not for the [government’s] cancellation of the indelible ink [for use on voters’ fingers to prevent them from voting multiple times], we would have got 10 or 15 more seats.

You started your political life in the opposition. Then you joined the mainstream and rose to become deputy prime minister. But an acrimonious split with then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad eventually landed you in jail. Now, a decade later, you are ba ck. Are you aiming to become prime minister?In terms of seats, we are very close to winning a majority in Parliament. Right now we have to build up consensus between the opposition parties. We have lots to build, lots of work ahead.

You are banned from holding office directly until April 15. What will you do after that?I have said at many events that I will contest a by-election after April 15. We have 31 M.P.s now, so this will not be difficult. But right now, I am not focused on that. Things are moving so fast. We have to set up four state governments and forge a strong coalition. This is a democracy, but still we are in a panic about the swearing-in.

What is it like having your wife and daughter as M.P.s?There was a press conference at the house and I was asking why, because I hadn’t called a press conference. Then my daughter said, “Papa, this is not for you. This is my press conference.” I was hoping to get the weekend off with [my wife] Azizah, but she has to go and visit her constituency. Sometimes, I do wonder why we chose these things. We’re not mad, but maybe a little crazy.

Do you still see yourself as an East-West fusion figure?I have been playing that role for a long time. It is an important one. You just can’t assume that people understand each other. In our party, you need to reassure both the Malays and the non-Malays. You need people working together, being more sensitive to each other. We had the three races [Malays, Chinese and Indians] going together and campaigning; we really are a multiracial party.

What about now, are you bridging the gap between the other two opposition parties?I have had extensive discussions with both of them. We agree we have to work to build a more cohesive opposition. In the next few days, we are going to meet in private and set out the parameters of lasting cooperation. We have already fixed the date and time.

What are your feelings toward your mentor turned nemesis, ex-prime minister Mahathir Mohamad?You brought him up, not me. I have forgotten him. He is old, he is not well and he is not an issue for me. I am not out to prove anything to him. In order to succeed, we have to look beyond him.

Has your time in prison altered any of your views?No one enjoys prison. It was a terrible time for me and my family. But it was at least a time for reflection. I read Shakespeare’s complete works four and a half times. I read the Qur’an, I read Chinese classics and the Hindu Ramayana, and many, many great novels. Except for days when I was at court, I was just reading from 8 in the morning until midnight.

What are the most pressing issues ahead?I passionately believe in democracy and freedom, more than before. These are issues of human concern that transcend race and religion. Before the election I was at a rally in a majority Chinese constituency, Bukit Penang. At the end, I had to hurry to another appointment. But a Chinese lady came up to me and she said, “Please, protect my children.” As you can see, I am feeling quite sentimental. I do draw the line about politics being just a game. People support you because you have principles.

................................................................

The Malaysian Race Card

The dust of the elections is still settling, and there are few signs the rhetoric over race is going to diminish.

Anwar Ibrahim’s big victory in Malaysia’s elections looked on the surface like a triumph for both democracy and multiculturalism—a major accomplishment in this profoundly divided state. The Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party and the Chinese-based Demo- cratic Action Party (DAP) contributed to the opposition gains, but it was Anwar’s multiethnic People’s Justice Party that bagged the largest share of the popular vote and parliamentary seats. Yet events immediately following the vote—when rabble-rousing politicians once again started playing the race card—show just how dangerous the splits remain.

Race has always played a peculiar role here, in this country of 25 million cobbled together by the British from disparate kingdoms. Ethnic Malays today make up 55 percent of the population. Ethnic Chinese represent an additional 25 percent, and Indians 8 percent. The Chinese minority has long been perceived as dominating Malaysia’s business community, causing widespread resentment among poorer Malays and sparking vicious riots in the 1960s. Since then, successive governments have justified restrictions on civil rights by pointing to this bloody history, and to their credit they have managed to avoid major violence for 40 years. But sweeping affirmative-action programs benefiting ethnic Malays, put in place in 1971, have kept tensions bubbling just under the surface.

Anwar’s People’s Justice Party vowed to replace this race-based assistance program with one that would help the needy regardless of ethnicity. And since its formation in 2003 his party has been growing in strength, thanks to support from Malays, Chinese and Indians alike, all frustrated by the lackluster economic performance of the ruling National Front (BN) coalition and its leader, Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi. But by the middle of last week the opposition had succumbed to tribal instincts, with the various parties squabbling among themselves over jobs in state governments and threatening boycotts if they didn’t get the seats they thought they deserved.

At the same time, members of the National Front’s lead party, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO), have continued to play the race card. Indeed, politicians affiliated with this party seem to feel it is their duty to do so. UMNO has portrayed itself as the champion and protector of the ethnic Malays, and some members have promoted ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy). Worryingly, some of UMNO’s younger politicians, once hailed as progressives, are now doing the same thing. UMNO youth chief Hishamuddin Hussein, for instance, has made a habit of brandishing the keris, the Malay dagger, at the party’s annual assembly—a gesture widely understood as a veiled threat to any race that dares challenge Malay supremacy. His deputy, and Badawi’s son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, recently warned that any split among the Malays—that is, any defection from UMNO—would be exploited by the Chinese.

Ironically, the same camps that play the race card are often just as quick to warn Malaysians of the consequences of acting on those feelings. And for the most part, that message has sunk in. Most Malaysians now recognize just how important the nation’s peace and stability are; indeed, they’re the bedrock on which Malaysia’s rapid economic development has depended. Yet as the dust of the elections settles, there are few signs the rhetoric over race is going to diminish. In the wealthy and mostly Chinese state of Penang, the Chinese DAP won power after 36 years of rule by the Malay-dominated BN. Incoming Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng quickly vowed to end the crude affirmative-action policy, which, he said, “only breeds cronyism, corruption and inefficiency.” In response, the prime minister warned the state not to marginalize Malays and said that “the state government must not try to create an atmosphere which can cause racial tensions.”

By many accounts race relations are now more tense than at any time since 1969. Ninety percent of Chinese students attend Chinese-language schools, while the majority of Malays attend public schools. Islam has taken a greater prominence in the social and political domains, breeding resentment among Indians and Chinese. Chinese and Indians, meanwhile, have become more vocal in opposing discriminatory policies, but they have given little indication that if they were granted greater equality they would rise above their own clannish tendencies. The enmity could erupt into violence. And if it does, it may, ironically, be triggered by the same affirmative-action policies that have done so much to prevent violence over the years.

The tragedy is that most Malaysians seem tired of the fractious politics of the past. Many Malaysians of all races have grown exasperated with Badawi’s failure to tackle corruption, crime and inflation. And they recognize that race-based politics is impairing social and economic progress. But unless the opposition parties can rise above the nation’s ethnic cleavages by learning to put national rather than ethnic interests at the forefront, ordinary Malaysians are unlikely to.